MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986505807 · doi:10.1097/jcn.0b013e3181dae445

Cognitive Impairment Predicts Functional Capacity in Dementia-Free Patients With Cardiovascular Disease

2010· article· en· W1986505807 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Skye N. McLennan, Jane L. Mathias, Lucy Brennan, Mary E. Russell, Simon Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMedicineDementiaConfoundingActivities of daily livingCognitionComorbidityLogistic regressionConfidence intervalDiseaseGerontologyOdds ratioCognitive impairmentPhysical therapyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: A high proportion of elderly people with cardiovascular diseases and risk factors have mild forms of cognitive impairment, the functional impact of which is poorly understood. The aim of this study was to determine whether subtle cognitive impairment contributes to limitations in instrumental activities of daily living in this group and whether this association is independent of physical comorbidity and other potentially confounding factors. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Two hundred and nineteen nondemented patients were recruited from cardiovascular and diabetic hospital outpatient clinics. Functional dependence was assessed using the self-report version of the instrumental activities of daily living scale. Cognitive ability was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Demographic and clinical information was collected via interview and a review of hospital records. Standard logistic regression was performed to identify factors independently associated with functional status. RESULTS: Five variables (sex, cardiovascular disease burden, non-cardiovascular disease burden, cognitive status, and age) were independently associated with an increased likelihood of requiring assistance with 1 or more everyday activities. The likelihood of needing assistance increased 2.05 times (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.59-2.79) for each additional cardiovascular diagnosis present and 1.12 times (95% CI, 1.01-1.27) for every point lower on MoCA. Thus, in comparison to a person with a perfect MoCA score, a person who scored in the cognitively impaired range (<23) was 7.7 (CI, 7.07-8.89) times more likely to report that he/she required assistance with an everyday activity. CONCLUSION: Cognitive impairments appear to reduce the ability to independently carry out routine daily tasks in patients with cardiovascular diseases and risk factors. Cognition should therefore be considered along with physical symptoms when assessing and responding to the support needs of this group.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Cardiovascular NursingSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207